Pages

24 Jan 2012

IPCA in breach of law

In late December 2011, I blogged about the website data.govt.nz, which allows public requests for information from various government funded departments without needing to go through the normal official channels.

I write to make a formal request for information under the Official Information Act 1982. Please supply me with the following information:

The total number of complaints made for each year since 2000
The number of complaints that are dismissed by the IPCA by year since 2000
The number of complaints upheld as valid by the police by year since 2000
The gender of the people making complaints by year since 2000
The age group of the people making complaints by year since 2000
The region where the complaints originate from by year since 2000
The amount of Police charged for a crime in relation to formal complaints by year since 2000.
The names of the Police charged for a crime in relation to formal complaints by year since 2000.

Please give an in-depth explanation if you're not able to supply any part of this formal request for information.

I believed my request was pretty straightforward... but unfortunately the IPCA had other ideas. On the 23 December, they replied to my formal request for information:

The IPCA is not subject to the Official Information Act, and further, is required by its legislation to conduct its investigations in private.

However some of the data you ask for is available through our Annual Report, which is available on our website www.ipca.govt.nz

For example, the number of complaints accepted in the most recent financial year, and for the previous five years, are noted on p.16 of the Annual Report, and are as follows.

(1) Where—
(a) the Prime Minister certifies that the giving of any information or the production of any document or thing might prejudice—
(i) the security or defence of New Zealand, or the international relations of the Government of New Zealand; or
(ii) any interest protected by section 7 of the Official Information Act 1982 (which relates to the Cook Islands, Niue, Tokelau, and the Ross Dependency); or
(b) the Attorney-General certifies that the giving of any information or the production of any document or thing—
(i) might prejudice the prevention, investigation, or detection of offences; or
(ii) might involve the disclosure of proceedings of Cabinet, or any committee of Cabinet, relating to matters of a secret or confidential nature, and such disclosure would be injurious to the public interest,—
the Authority shall not require the information to be given, or, as the case may be, the document or thing to be produced.
(2) Except as provided in subsection (1), the rule of law which authorises or requires the withholding of any document, or the refusal to answer any question, on the ground that the disclosure of the document or the answering of the question would be injurious to the public interest, shall not apply in respect of any investigation by or proceedings before the Authority.

Clearly the information requested will not prejudice New Zealand's security or our international relations... it will not inhibit the Police from doing their job.

The information requested will not be injurious to the public interest, although it could be injurious to Police credibility... that's the only reason I can think of that would cause Kathryn Street to lie about the laws the IPCA should adhere to.

Not only is the IPCA in breach of the OIA by ignoring the initial request for information, they're also in breach of the OIA under section 16 Documents (3)(b) by not providing details on the reason for their contemptuous decision.

Perhaps the IPCA doesn't uphold any complaints about the misconduct of Police officers, but without the relevant information being provided... I guess we will never know.